I'll sum a bunch of these posts up with this answer: A good teacher will recognize a kid who can excel and adjust their classroom in any way possible to accommodate. They are limited by funds, class size, and what each school permits. Sometimes the accommodations require time out of a regular classroom, or honors classes, etc. Sometimes if the student is having problems, they need extra help or a separate classroom or on rare occasions a big dude to sit on them until they learn to fucking behave. Both options are expensive, both are necessary. You can not simply abandon a part of your society to stupidity and expect your society to live on. Also, in conclusion, all of Scott's ideas on education are horrible.
Both options are expensive, both are necessary. You can not simply abandon a part of your society to stupidity and expect your society to live on.
Agreed. I received an exceptional education from an ability-segregated segment classes in high school for gifted children. Poor performing students need an equal level of intervention and engagement above and beyond what the middle of the bell curve gets.
A good teacher will recognize a kid who can excel and adjust their classroom in any way possible to accommodate.
My problem with fully integrated classes is that this was never the case in all my years of schooling. Each class was literally and openly taught at the rate of the slowest student. Each unit was run until every student passed with a B or better. This was by design.
Of the dozens of examples, the worst is probably the metric system, as taught to seventh graders. (Note that I already understood the metric system, as did the majority of the students in the class, which was itself general science).
30 kids. 20 of them know the metric system just fine already. 5 learn it after a week or so. The remaining 5 just can't grasp it. Daily repeated lessons, weekly tests, and no way to move on to the next unit until every student gets a B. The rest of the class, getting perfect scores on the repeated tests, are not excused from the homework/busywork, and aren't allowed to read or study other units.
This went on for TWO FUCKING MONTHS!
Every experience I ever had with integrated classrooms was like this. I know a good teacher can make it work, and I don't believe in total segregation (just in classes where it matters), but I've never seen it working in person.
What I saw, time and time again, was smart students growing increasingly resentful of the kids holding them back, increasingly belligerent and disrespectful of the (admittedly useless) teachers and classes, and generally disengaging from education altogether. Meanwhile, the poor performers (who obviously need real focused help) aren't getting it, feel increasingly stupid for being obviously the ones holding everyone else back, and ALSO begin to disengage.
It's a cycle that ends in disaster.
I would have been content had I just been allowed to pursue my own interests whenever a teacher or class had nothing more to offer me. Let me sit at my desk and read, and skip the pointless homework retreading trodden ground day after day, and I wouldn't have cared less.
But no, I (and the others in the same boat) were punished for having the gall to not pay attention to a repeated and pointless lecture. My history textbook was confiscated when I dared to read it surreptitiously in class rather than "practice" converting centimeters to millimeters on a fucking worksheet.
Even if you disagree with the principle of ability-based education, you must agree that a integrated classroom that is managed the way mine were does nothing more than breed resentment and contempt on both sides of the bell curve.
Every experience I ever had with integrated classrooms was like this. I know a good teacher can make it work, and I don't believe in total segregation (just in classes where it matters), but I've never seen it working in person.
What I saw, time and time again, was smart students growing increasingly resentful of the kids holding them back, increasingly belligerent and disrespectful of the (admittedly useless) teachers and classes, and generally disengaging from education altogether. Meanwhile, the poor performers (who obviously need real focused help) aren't getting it, feel increasingly stupid for being obviously the ones holding everyone else back, and ALSO begin to disengage.
It's a cycle that ends in disaster.
This has been my experience as well. After a while most of my friends who fell into this pattern just flat out dropped out and got their GED to go to college a year or two early.
It doesn't take long for a brilliant child to realize that they system can't keep up with them and then they start to disregard school entirely. Even some of the extra work and challenges some of my teachers (most did not care or didn't have the time to spend with me at least) came up with eventually fell upon deaf ears as the system as a whole failed for us.
I was truly lucky in that I was accepted into a bridge program and was able to spend my senior year attending college. Not one or two classes but as a fully matriculated student. Only one person scored higher on the entrance exam that year; I would have aced it except we don't(well, they didn't when I was there, maybe they do now?) teach calculus in high school.
My history class was just the teacher having us highlight every other sentence in the workbook. I read the whole book in the first month of class, and then I was bored for the rest of the year. I would sit in the back and draw comics. The teacher would constantly reprimand me for not taking notes or paying attention, but I got good grades on every test. Finally they just left me alone to draw.
My history class was just the teacher having us highlight every other sentence in the workbook. I read the whole book in the first month of class, and then I was bored for the rest of the year. I would sit in the back and draw comics. The teacher would constantly reprimand me for not taking notes or paying attention, but I got good grades on every test. Finally they just left me alone to draw.
To the people accusing me of being Ayn Rubin, in what way does this help the kids lower on the totem pole?
To the people accusing me of being Ayn Rubin, in what way does this help the kids lower on the totem pole?
Ummm, that just sounds like a bad teacher... Almost every history class I was ever in especially in high school had the readings as homework and the class was mainly fun exercises and discussions.
To the people accusing me of being Ayn Rubin, in what way does this help the kids lower on the totem pole?
Ummm, that just sounds like a bad teacher... Almost every history class I was ever in especially in high school had the readings as homework and the class was mainly fun exercises and discussions.
Most teachers are bad teachers. There's no way to actually get all good teachers in every school without paying more than those people would make in private industry. Good teachers will be good no matte what the system is. Therefore, the purpose of the system needs to make sure kids are educated despite bad teaching. A segregated system does that very well because the highly achieving students will achieve a fuckton on their own if they are given freedom, which is incredibly inexpensive.
A segregated system does that very well because the highly achieving students will achieve a fuckton on their own if they are given freedom, which is incredibly inexpensive.
It also allows for a higher chance of struggling children getting specialized help from teachers with expert knowledge and skill in dealing with learning disabilities and similar issues. The average teacher in the average classroom doesn't have that, but the specialists do.
Everyone here who went to any school whatsoever, elementary, public, private, college, whatever. Count how many teachers you had total. Now count how many were amazing and memorable in a Stand and Deliver kind of way. You don't need a study to know it's less than half.
Speaking of your school years, Rym & Scott; while you were totally pwning everyone in your classes did you ever get stuffed into lockers or otherwise bullied? That's one classic aspect of geekery that I haven't heard addressed on Geeknights.
I would be hard-pressed to say that the "geeks" were the popular ones in my high school, though to some degree it is true. More accurately, the people who did interesting things were popular, and geeks fit that bill pretty well.
Moreover, I felt no anti-intellectual bias in high school. I feel that quite a bit now in Ohio -- people who use words with more than two syllables are considered strange. God-fearing salt-of-the-earth folks don't need no education other than what they gets in the Bible or on CBS, apparently.
while you were totally pwning everyone in your classes did you ever get stuffed into lockers or otherwise bullied?
Only in Public Schools. The behaviour in the catholic school I went to for most of my elementary years couldn't be called bulling compared the egregious conduct allowed elsewhere.
Scott, it isn't just your tone when talking about education that makes me think of Rand. Think about all the plans you have for when you are homeless. Think about all the times when you say "Getting a job is easy." Maybe you don't actually believe what you are saying, and think society and other people should actually help the less fortunate. But your tone is really anti-compassionate, to the point of sneering.
Your stereotypical nerd has very little compassion or empathy, it's sort of a hallmark of nerd culture. This is a major part of why asperger's is so often indistinguishable from a regular nerd.
But your tone is really anti-compassionate, to the point of sneering.
We argue on these points constantly. It's as though he can't understand that someone else's circumstances could be different from his own.
Getting a job is easy... if you have a BS in a technical field from a prestigious university, live in New York, are young, are skilled, and have a wealth of industry experience. Simple, right?
Scott, it isn't just your tone when talking about education that makes me think of Rand. Think about all the plans you have for when you are homeless. Think about all the times when you say "Getting a job is easy." Maybe you don't actually believe what you are saying, and think society and other people should actually help the less fortunate. But your tone is really anti-compassionate, to the point of sneering.
Ayn Rand is like, fuck the other people. I got my shit in order, let them rot.
I want to help all the people. The thing is, I'm really not optimistic about any success in that area. Society, especially in the US, is so corrupt and fucked up from top to bottom. There's no way to fix it without big changes. Those big changes are very difficult to make because there are chicken/egg problems and catch-22s around every corner. If there's every an opportunity to make those kind of big changes I'll jump on it so fast. It can happen, look at Egypt.
That being said, there are people smarter than me and people less smart than me. That doesn't mean I'm not going to live my life any less than the best way I know how, and I can't blame anyone else for doing the same.
"We end up punishing honor students to send a message to bad kids. But the data indicate that the bad kids are not getting the message." -- Professor Russell Skiba
To contribute to the discussion. Zero Tolerance Schools Discipline Without Wiggle Room "We end up punishing honor students to send a message to bad kids. But the data indicate that the bad kids are not getting the message." -- Professor Russell Skiba
Zero tolerance policies are amazing in the harm they do to education.
To contribute to the discussion. Zero Tolerance Schools Discipline Without Wiggle Room "We end up punishing honor students to send a message to bad kids. But the data indicate that the bad kids are not getting the message." -- Professor Russell Skiba
Zero tolerance policies are amazing in the harm they do to education.I agree with only very limited exceptions. My school needs zero tolerance, but we're far, far, far from the norm. Normal schools + zero tolerance = stupid.
I agree with only very limited exceptions. My school needs zero tolerance, but we're far, far, far from the norm. Normal schools + zero tolerance = stupid.
In any school, all the teachers know who the disruptive kids are. I'm really beginning to seriously think that the crazy idea of military academy is not so crazy. The chronically misbehaving kids should be sent to a school with military discipline, regardless of their level of academic achievement. I imagine those kids who were falling behind would be much less behind if they were in a school environment without bullies or other troublemakers. Just a few bad eggs per classroom can seriously ruin the other 90%+ of the student's education in the room for an entire year. It doesn't need to be zero tolerance. Everyone has their bad days. But if a kid is truly and verifiably chronically disruptive, get them out.
Comments
Also, in conclusion, all of Scott's ideas on education are horrible.
Of the dozens of examples, the worst is probably the metric system, as taught to seventh graders. (Note that I already understood the metric system, as did the majority of the students in the class, which was itself general science).
30 kids. 20 of them know the metric system just fine already. 5 learn it after a week or so. The remaining 5 just can't grasp it. Daily repeated lessons, weekly tests, and no way to move on to the next unit until every student gets a B. The rest of the class, getting perfect scores on the repeated tests, are not excused from the homework/busywork, and aren't allowed to read or study other units.
This went on for TWO FUCKING MONTHS!
Every experience I ever had with integrated classrooms was like this. I know a good teacher can make it work, and I don't believe in total segregation (just in classes where it matters), but I've never seen it working in person.
What I saw, time and time again, was smart students growing increasingly resentful of the kids holding them back, increasingly belligerent and disrespectful of the (admittedly useless) teachers and classes, and generally disengaging from education altogether. Meanwhile, the poor performers (who obviously need real focused help) aren't getting it, feel increasingly stupid for being obviously the ones holding everyone else back, and ALSO begin to disengage.
It's a cycle that ends in disaster.
I would have been content had I just been allowed to pursue my own interests whenever a teacher or class had nothing more to offer me. Let me sit at my desk and read, and skip the pointless homework retreading trodden ground day after day, and I wouldn't have cared less.
But no, I (and the others in the same boat) were punished for having the gall to not pay attention to a repeated and pointless lecture. My history textbook was confiscated when I dared to read it surreptitiously in class rather than "practice" converting centimeters to millimeters on a fucking worksheet.
Even if you disagree with the principle of ability-based education, you must agree that a integrated classroom that is managed the way mine were does nothing more than breed resentment and contempt on both sides of the bell curve.
It doesn't take long for a brilliant child to realize that they system can't keep up with them and then they start to disregard school entirely. Even some of the extra work and challenges some of my teachers (most did not care or didn't have the time to spend with me at least) came up with eventually fell upon deaf ears as the system as a whole failed for us.
I was truly lucky in that I was accepted into a bridge program and was able to spend my senior year attending college. Not one or two classes but as a fully matriculated student. Only one person scored higher on the entrance exam that year; I would have aced it except we don't(well, they didn't when I was there, maybe they do now?) teach calculus in high school.
Moreover, I felt no anti-intellectual bias in high school. I feel that quite a bit now in Ohio -- people who use words with more than two syllables are considered strange. God-fearing salt-of-the-earth folks don't need no education other than what they gets in the Bible or on CBS, apparently.
Getting a job is easy... if you have a BS in a technical field from a prestigious university, live in New York, are young, are skilled, and have a wealth of industry experience. Simple, right?
I want to help all the people. The thing is, I'm really not optimistic about any success in that area. Society, especially in the US, is so corrupt and fucked up from top to bottom. There's no way to fix it without big changes. Those big changes are very difficult to make because there are chicken/egg problems and catch-22s around every corner. If there's every an opportunity to make those kind of big changes I'll jump on it so fast. It can happen, look at Egypt.
That being said, there are people smarter than me and people less smart than me. That doesn't mean I'm not going to live my life any less than the best way I know how, and I can't blame anyone else for doing the same.
Zero Tolerance Schools Discipline Without Wiggle Room